(Poll) Integrating nanobots for cruisers/gunboats

[Tenacity]

Some time ago, battlecruisers and battleships had their nanobots removed, and the equivalent amount of repair capacity added to the ship's base hull. This was, from what I've heard, done primarily to help the new repair ship beams, but also prevents these ships (more in the case of BCs, and less in BSs) from being insta-killed due to an overwhelming alpha strike against their hull.

The problem is, the same treatment wasnt made for smaller caps. Right now, most cruisers with less than a cap 6 armor upgrade (and even light cruisers with heavier upgrades) can still be one shot by a battlecruiser or battleship using multiple mortars. Granted, it doesnt happen super often when dealing with battleships, but because battlecruisers can easily keep up with the speed of a cruiser, while having longer ranged weaponry, it starts to become an issue - one mistake, and the cruiser finds himself going from 100% hull to smoldering wreck because of a triple mortar strike.

Gunboats as well have the same issue, except IMO it's worse for them because they have to get extremely close to other cap ships to deal damage. They're harder to hit, sure, but it only takes one heavy mortar or a couple light mortars to mop up a gunship instantly once deshielded.


The end result is that these ships dont 'feel' like capships. Realistically no multi-crew warship should be getting completely annihilated in one hit. The same reasoning was put behind the SNAC nerf because bombers were one shotting other snubs.

I'd like to see the same nanobot integration treatment added for both gunboats and cruisers. Vote if you agree or disagree.

---

[Thunderer]

Integrate them for fighters and no longer worry about instakills.

---

Bretonian Treaty Database Bretonian Armed Forces Recruitment Center
Bretonian Charter of Interstellar Law Bretonian Secrets Act

[Sand-Viper]

I would honestly like to see nanobots fused into the hulls of all ships across the board. I'll admit, it's satisfying to be on the giving end of an insta-kill, but it's immeasurably frustrating to be on the receiver's side. Nothing was more frustrating back in the day than getting a bomber to 10% hull and no regens and then suddenly having a win taken away from me by a cheap, lucky shot. Granted, SNACs are no longer like that, but you can still double-MR via SHFs.

Imo it would still be decently satisfying to say, double-razor/MR a snub and watch a good chunk of its HP drop, but I feel like insta-kill strategies hurt rookies more than anything.

Now, I can see the other side of things, here: This would shake up the snub meta a bit, such as making double-nuke trapping impossible. The trade-off could possibly be to buff mines accordingly, thus making them the one way you can cheese a kill, which is something any snub can pull off, rather than just SHFs or Bombers.

I digress - Back on topic, I think merging nanos into cruisers and gunboats is a great start.

---

The Gaelic Wyvern Inn
If you've interacted with us recently, please consider checking out our in-character Public Guest Reviews thread!

[Couden]

Integrate them for fighters and no longer worry about instakills.

And back SNAC damage to Snubs

---

---

[SnakeLancerHaven]

I voted yes but only if Gunboats get their previous turrets back, so no more spreading.

---

R.I.P Tabris...
Youtube - Twitch - My old Account

[sasapinjic]

Integrate them for fighters and no longer worry about instakills.

And for SHF to, so that when CAU VI Osprey get hit by lucky shoot, dont leave 520 regens unused...

[Tenacity]

I mean, I can agree that snub one shots probably shouldnt happen either, but at least its a little more believable for a small one-man ship to get ripped a new one by a well placed shot, and snubs are by far the most difficult ships to hit with anything that can deal enough damage to instakill.

The real issue is that for every ship that has this change made, the ini entries for its armor value have to be changed, and it can be a very time consuming process. Going through and changing the armor and nanobot capacity for every single fighter, bomber, freighter, transport, etc. in addition to cruisers and gunboats would probably be a right nightmare (though if the dev team wants, I'm more than willing to go through that hassle, I'm relatively good at ini editing now).

So, I'd venture to say that we should just start with the big ships that are frequently involved in combat.

---

[Grumblesaur]

I mean, I can agree that snub one shots probably shouldnt happen either, but at least its a little more believable for a small one-man ship to get ripped a new one by a well placed shot, and snubs are by far the most difficult ships to hit with anything that can deal enough damage to instakill.

The real issue is that for every ship that has this change made, the ini entries for its armor value have to be changed, and it can be a very time consuming process. Going through and changing the armor and nanobot capacity for every single fighter, bomber, freighter, transport, etc. in addition to cruisers and gunboats would probably be a right nightmare (though if the dev team wants, I'm more than willing to go through that hassle, I'm relatively good at ini editing now).

So, I'd venture to say that we should just start with the big ships that are frequently involved in combat.

Probably a good change to roll out in phases. For one patch, just hit all the cruisers and battlecruisers. Later, do transports. Another patch hits freighters and SHFs, then one that does VHFs and bombers, and last, HFs and LFs.

This is a good idea, considering the only real purpose of nanobots and shield batteries is to be a "gotcha" when a few hits sneak up on you or when your finger slips onto the wrong key. It definitely streamlines the combat process and would mean that the red and blue meters you see when you target a ship are a genuine reflection of that ship's state.

This would also allow for the removal or disabling of the code that prevents the trading of nanobots and shield batteries, which is one less thing for the server to support. It's probably a very minor performance gain (if any) but it reduces complexity without detracting from the gameplay experience, so it's well worth mulling over.

---

A way a lone a last a loved a long the riverrun, past Eve and Adam's, from swerve of shore to bend of bay,
brings us by a commodius vicus of recirculation back to Howth Castle and Environs.